Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:08, 3 December 2007

All I'm asking is for the source to be cited. Use <ref> tags so that it is properly cited. For information on this, see WP:CITET. It would also help if the specific audio file where they discuss this is mentioned, as there are about 10 hours of audio on the page mentioned by SignOfTheTimes on the talk pages. Thanks. Gravee 17:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Your 'WP:CITET' is your boy scout manual. If the boy scout manual says to start a fire by rubbing two sticks together, only a dope would rub two sticks together if he/she had a BIC lighter in their pocket. This is not an Earth changing matter and it is not the kind of thing worthy of a press release or newspaper story. They are engaged, they have shown that they are in numerous photographs all over the net and declared that they are engaged in 'official' declarations on their OWN personal web pages and public MySpace pages as well as on Chantal's talk show. Further verification is not called for - this is not a life or death issue, except to delusional fanatics. Delusional personalities will continue to find fault with any and all 'proof' offered. DrDelos 17:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

• Lol. I'm not saying that it isn't true. But if it is, and you wish it to be on wikipedia, then you must follow wikipedia's policy. Just like you have to follow the laws of physics when creating a fire, you can't do so with just water and a wish. Gravee 17:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

". . . then you must follow wikipedia's policy" No. There are hundreds of thousands of 'things' described on Misplaced Pages pages that are *not* verified in any conceivable way, yet they remain. Hundreds of thousands of statements that are far more important than an engagement notice between two rock band singers.

The only statement that has a reference on James' page is the drinking urine claim. Not one other assertion made in that article is verified or has requests for citation EXCEPT the engagement notice. If the engagement was NOT true, both James and Chantal would be clamoring to have it removed. Instead, they have offered more upon more evidence that the claim is true. On the other side, I count 3, maybe 4 'fans' with no contact with any members of either of the bands and an obstinate refusal to take any affirmative steps to actually determine the truth. As long as you keep vandalizing the pages, I will keep correcting them. If you want to learn the truth, several of us have told you how.DrDelos 22:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Chantal Claret & Little Jimmy Urine

Welcome to Misplaced Pages, and thank you for your contributions. However, please be aware of Misplaced Pages's policy that biographical information about living persons must not be libelous. Any controversial statements about a living person added to an article must include proper sources. Thank you.

Myspace is not considered a reliable source, neither is a dead link. Pleas do not remove reference section templates from this article. --Neon white 17:20, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Please stop adding unreferenced controversial biographical content to articles. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Misplaced Pages policy. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. --Neon white 19:49, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I know Chantal. I moderate her Morningwood forum. I know for a fact that she is engaged to James. SHE asked ME to stay on top of her Misplaced Pages article because it was being vandalized over and over with specific problems concerning the engagement reference. I have been doing that. It was the complaints about the official status of the engagement that caused her to make postings and blog entries on her board, MySpace and elsewhere to state for the record that she IS engaged to James. James did the same thing. The matter is settled. Go back and read the entire history of the Chantal Claret article with particular attention to the engagement issue. Anybody can claim that any reference given here is questionable. Example: IMDB lists Chantal Claret as being married to James. She is not. If somebody edited her article here to say she was married and used the IMDB as a reference, they would STILL be wrong. Sources and references can always make mistakes. The nature of Misplaced Pages tends to correct those mistakes over time. When hundreds of people who know the subject or have personal knowledge of a fact in an article, it is only a matter of time before the article is edited to include the fact. If, over time, that fact is incorrect, somebody else will fix it. Eventually the article is boiled down to the true facts. That boiling down process finally got to the bottom of the engagement reference. Go back and look at how long this article has essentially stayed unchanged. Chantal and James both peruse their listings and correct errors that creep in.

Since it appears that making drastic edits here on Wikipedai is your hobby, I suggest that you find some topic of more importance than bios of two musicians to hack up. There are millions of entries that you haven't ever even seen. Just think of all the edits that lie before you without anyone who will repair your slash and burn modifications over and over.

DrDelos 22:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I just did about 32 seconds worth of research and found a perfect example for you. Captain & Tennille It is a rather substantial biography with virtually NO sources or references. When you bring that bio up to snuff, come on back to Chantal's and even James' bios. There really is no justification at all to destroy the bios of relatively unknown artists like Chantal and James for lack of references (that you approve of) when there are articles like the Captain & Tennille example about extremely famous people which has practically no source or reference material.

DrDelos 00:42, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

If an article is being excessively vandalized you can request protection at WP:Request for page protection. Misplaced Pages requires reliable and verifiable sources for all articles, especially those about living persons. It is not based on personal opinions or what people might think they know. Myspace pages and forums are not considered reliable as they are self-published and there is no guarantee to their accuracy. Ideally a third party source is the best source for article about people. The IMDB would likely be acceptable as a reliable source, if no other source can be found that is contrary to their info then, as far as wikipedia is concerned, that is the verfiable fact. If there is ambiguity over the fact then the best action is to either leave it out entirely or to explain the ambiguity. The state of any other article has no relevance to the state of this article, i am not personally responsible for all wikipedia content being up to standards. If you feel that particular article needs improving then tag it 'unreferenced'. If you are to be believed and have a personal relationship with any subject of this article then I suggest you read the guidelines on a conflict of interest. --Neon white 18:26, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

So Misplaced Pages ". . . requires reliable and verifiable sources for all articles"??? That is absolute bull and I just showed you a perfect example above. Why won't you try to delete everything in the Captain & Tennille article that isn't referenced? You won't because you are acting like a typical schoolyard bully. ie. You pick on the less popular and/or smaller kids so you won't be exposed as a bluffing bluster. You are trying to use the "rules" here to fight against common sense. Read 'The Death of Common Sense' to understand what you are doing and why you are doing it. References must be used with COMMON SENSE. I just showed that by means of the IMDB entry for Chantal. That precious reference is WRONG. Quit bullying this article. There are MILLIONS of others here that you can hack up and fall back on the "rules" to help you. DrDelos 05:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)